northern atlantic regional shorebird plan

U.S. Shorebird

Conservation Plan

Northern Atlantic

Regional Shorebird Plan

Version 1.0

Prepared by:

Kathleen E. Clark

Lawrence J. Niles

Endangered and Nongame Species Program

NJ Division of Fish and Wildlife

2201 Route 631, Woodbine, NJ 08270

and

Members of the Northern Atlantic Shorebird Habitat Working Group

Table of Contents

Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................................... 1

1. Description of the Region ....................................................................................................................... 2

2. Shorebird Species Occurrence and Regional Species Priorities ............................................................. 3

3. Regional Goals ........................................................................................................................................ 3

4. Habitat Goals, Objectives and Management Needs ............................................................................... 4

A) Habitat Objectives: ............................................................................................................................ 4

B) Management Objectives: .................................................................................................................... 5

5. Management Coordination and Monitoring Needs ................................................................................ 5

6. Research Goals ....................................................................................................................................... 8

7. Education Goals ...................................................................................................................................... 8

8. Funding Needs for Regional Goals (by State and Area) ........................................................................ 8

9. Recognition of individuals and organizations who contributed to the regional report. ........................... 9

Appendix A. Maps of two BCRs found in the North Atlantic region. ..................................................... 19

Appendix B. Estimated costs for monitoring, management and research needs by area. ........................ 23

Northern Atlantic Regional Shorebird Plan Page 1

Executive Summary

The North Atlantic planning region is one of the most heavily populated areas in the U.S. Many wetland

habitats have been affected by development, causing wetlands loss, pollution, and increased human

access leading to disturbance. The Atlantic coast beaches and bays, however still have high quality

habitats that have become more essential to shorebirds than ever before. The region is critical to the

survival of hemispheric populations of some species (e.g., Red Knots, Piping Plovers, Whimbrels),

which would be decimated by continued habitat degradation or catastrophic chemical or petroleum

spills.

The North Atlantic region has a number of inherent strengths supporting effective shorebird protection:

1) a huge constituency with reasonably good access to shorebird viewing opportunities: 2) large portions

of habitat in public ownership (averaging 60%-95% in most states); and 3) strong state land use

regulations that affect actions on private land.

The potent threats in the region are almost the flip side of the strengths. Large human population centers

create a substantial threat from development and disturbance, and cause a significant potential for

resource conflicts. Further, the northeast Atlantic Coast is always under the threat of catastrophic oil

spills and consequent damage to shorebird habitat or shorebirds themselves. The major weaknesses in

existing protection center on inadequate funding for management and surveys, thus leading to an

insufficient database on population, distribution, and habitats.

Combining these strengths, weaknesses and threats, our group developed a number of opportunities that

may be unique to the North Atlantic region: First, strong state agencies create the potential for creative

intra- and interstate shorebird projects; second, the large human population and easy access to important

shorebird sites create a significant opportunity for improving recreational use of shorebirds with small

increases in funding for developing access; and third, strong agency interest exists for developing

interspecies management and protection.

The group considered the regional strengths and threats, and suggested the following high priority

project:

1. Begin region-wide coastal surveys conducted by individual state agencies and coordinated by the

USFWS throughout the region.

2. Work on-site at known important areas to reduce disturbance, identify and protect critical food

resources, and control predation.

3. Significantly improve impoundment management, also coordinated throughout the region.

4. Create a strong emphasis on volunteer banding and wardening, as methods to increase awareness.

5. Develop coordinated state and federal satellite habitat mapping, delineating all important shorebird

habitats.

6. Establish a number of "all bird" Joint Venture projects.

7. Improve spill prevention and emergency response.


1. Description of the Region

The North Atlantic planning region is within the Atlantic Flyway, and encompasses all or part of the

following states: Virginia (VA), Maryland (MD), Delaware (DE), New Jersey (NJ), Pennsylvania (PA),

New York (NY), Connecticut (CT), Rhode Island (RI), Massachusetts (MA), Vermont (VT), New

Hampshire (NH), and Maine (ME). Habitats range from rocky shorelines to sandy bay beaches to tidal

mudflats. The major habitat types are: 1) beach front, including high-energy beaches, sandy deltas,

rock and gravel shorelines, and high beach/dune; 2) intertidal mudflats lacking vegetation (mudflats and

muddy creek banks); 3) vegetated intertidal marshes (dominated by Spartina cordgrass); 4) managed

impoundments, both brackish and freshwater; 5) inland habitats (such as forested wetlands and

peninsulas that concentrate migrants), as well as managed uplands (airports and pastures).

The North Atlantic region is extremely important for transient shorebirds during both northbound and

southbound migrations. The region is critical for the Western Hemisphere population of Red Knots

(Calidris canutus rufa), which is extremely concentrated in Delaware Bay each spring. It also supports

most of the Atlantic Flyway's breeding Piping Plover (Charadrius melodus), a federally threatened

species. Shorebirds in this region face potential impacts from: 1) recreational disturbances to foraging

and nesting birds, 2) oil spills, 3) extraction of resources affecting shorebird food supplies (e.g.,

horseshoe crabs), 4) habitat loss due to development, 5) predators, 6) contaminants, and 7) habitat

management that lacks integration with shorebird needs.

The North Atlantic region includes two Bird Conservation Regions, the North Atlantic Coastal Plain and

the Atlantic Northern Forests (Appendix A). Descriptions of these follow, taken from "A Proposed

Framework for Delineating Ecologically-based Planning, Implementation, and Evaluation Units for

Cooperative Bird Conservation in the U.S."

North Atlantic Coastal Plain — This BCR has the densest human population of any region in the

country. Much land that was formerly cleared for agriculture is now either in forest or residential use.

The highest priority birds are in coastal wetland and beach habitats. These include the Saltmarsh Sharp-

tailed Sparrows and Nelson’s Sharp-tailed Sparrows, Seaside Sparrows, Piping Plover, American

Oystercatchers, wintering Black Ducks, and Black Rails. The region includes critical migration sites for

Red Knot, and key staging areas for Ruddy Turnstones, Sanderlings, Semipalmated Sandpipers, and

Dunlin. Most of the continental population of the endangered Roseate Terns nests on islands off NY and

the southern New England states. Other terns, and gulls nest in large numbers and large mixed colonies

of herons, egrets, and ibis may form on islands in the Delaware and Chesapeake Bay regions and Long

Island. Estuarine complexes in this region are extremely important to wintering and migrating

waterfowl, including Great Bay (NH), Long Island Sound, Peconic and Great South bays (NY),

Delaware Bay, Chesapeake Bay, and embayments created behind barrier beaches. Approximately 65%

of the total wintering Black Duck population can be found in coastal areas between Long Island and

North Carolina. Exploitation and pollution of Chesapeake Bay and Absecon Bay (NJ), and the

accompanying loss of submerged aquatic vegetation, have significantly reduced their value to

waterfowl.

Atlantic Northern Forests — The nutrient-poor soils of northernmost New England and the Adirondack

Mountains support spruce-fir forests on more northerly and higher sites and northern hardwoods

elsewhere. Virtually all of the world’s Bicknells’s Thrush breed on mountaintops in this region. Other

important forest birds include the Canada Warbler and Bay-breasted Warbler. Coastal wetlands are

inhabited by Nelson’s Sharp-tailed Sparrows, rocky intertidal areas are important for wintering Purple

Sandpipers, and muddy intertidal habitats are critical as Semipalmated Sandpiper staging sites. Common

Eiders and Black Guillemots breed in coastal habitats, while Leach’s Storm-Petrels, gulls, terns, and the


southernmost populations of breeding alcids nest on offshore islands. Beaver ponds and shores of

undisturbed lakes and ponds provide excellent waterfowl breeding habitat, particularly for American

Black Ducks, Hooded and Common Mergansers, and Common Goldeneyes. The Hudson and

Connecticut river valleys are important migration corridors for ducks and geese. Because inland

wetlands freeze, coastal wetlands in Maine are used extensively by dabbling ducks, sea ducks and geese

during winter and migration. Coastal wetlands in Maine (including Merrymeeting Bay and Cobscook

Bay) are important wintering sites for waterfowl.

2. Shorebird Species Occurrence and Regional Species Priorities

Species of highest priority in this region include Piping Plover, American Oystercatcher (Haematopus

palliatus), Red Knot, Whimbrel (Numenius phaeopus), American Woodcock (Scolopax minor), and

Eskimo Curlew (Numenius borealis). The regional and national priority rankings are included in Table

1. Regional ranks of species may change as more information on their abundance and distribution (or

concentration areas) is collected. The seasonal occurrence and guild category of significant shorebird

species in this region are listed in Table 2.

Shorebird populations have been surveyed to varying degrees by states and non-governmental

organizations in the North Atlantic region. Shorebird numbers fluctuate widely across seasons and

habitats, however, making survey techniques difficult to apply broadly in the region. The group

provided limited data on shorebird counts, and related those counts to estimated hemispheric populations

(Table 3), to estimate importance of regional habitats. For many species, however, data on seasonal

shorebird populations in the region are not available.

Populations of two high priority species, breeding Piping Plovers and migrating Red Knots, are known

with some confidence. Piping plovers nesting in the region numbered 1,135 pairs in 1997, the majority

(81%) of the Atlantic Coast population. An estimated 80% (and possibly more) of the New World

populations of Red Knots and Whimbrels migrates through the region each spring, making the region

critical to these species' survival.

We used the regional prioritization of species, combined with the importance of seasonal use in the

region, to re-list the species by habitat types (Table 4). This table more clearly catalogues the highest

priority species according to habitat, and suggests habitat and management objectives that follow.

3. Regional Goals

Population Goals and Objectives: Maintain or enhance current or historic population levels and

diversity of shorebirds throughout the North Atlantic Region through cooperation and partnership with

state, federal, private, and non-governmental conservation organizations.

Objectives:

a) Estimate current or historic population levels, using the best available data subject to analysis and

revision (e.g., area surveys, International Shorebird Survey, CBC data).

b) Maintain or enhance shorebird populations, both abundance and species diversity, and monitor

populations through reliable and cost-effective techniques.

c) Develop and implement research priorities to create management and protection strategies.


4. Habitat Goals, Objectives and Management Needs

Habitat Goal: Protect and manage sufficient area of high priority habitats to support current

populations of breeding, migrating, and wintering shorebirds.

A) Habitat Objectives:

Highest priority

Identify and manage sufficient breeding habitat (beachfront) for PIPL, AMOY. Requires strict

protection of known sites, as well as enhancement/restoration of other sites.

Identify and manage foraging and roosting habitat (intertidal-mud) for WHIM, HUGO, REKN,

SESA to maintain migration stopover integrity, by protecting and managing key concentration areas.

Provide foraging and roosting habitat (intertidal-marsh) for WHIM through protection and

management at key sites.

Identify and manage sufficient foraging and roosting habitat (intertidal complexes and

impoundments) to maintain and enhance regional populations important in the region, for species

with overlapping requirements (RUTU, SESA, SBDO, SAND, DUNL, BBPL, WRSA).

High Priority

Identify and manage breeding and foraging habitat (intertidal-marsh) for WILL throughout the

region.

Identify and manage inland habitats for UPSA, BBSA, and AMWO.

Protect and enhance inland and migratory concentration areas for AMWO.

Identify and protect offshore staging sites for RNPH.

Acquire land through partnerships to protect and manage habitat that benefits shorebirds, rare

species, waterfowl and migrant land birds.

Identify and protect sufficient winter habitat for PUSA, including rock jetties and shorelines.

Moderate Priority

Identify and manage sufficient breeding habitat (beachfront) for WIPL. Requires strict protection of

known sites, as well as enhancement/restoration of other sites.

We categorized habitats used by shorebirds into five main types, listed below, and specified the major

uses of each of these habitats by shorebirds (breeding=B, foraging=F, and roosting=R). How shorebirds

use these habitats will help define management approaches and priorities.

Habitat types used by shorebirds in the N.A. region:

Beach Front

High energy beach fronts (F,B)

Sandy flats (e.g., inlet interfaces at low tide) (F)

Rock jetties and groins (F,R)

High beach and dunes (B,F,R)

Intertidal -- non-vegetated

Muddy flats (F)

Muddy banks (F)

Intertidal -- vegetated

Brackish and saline marshes (F,R)

Salt pannes (B,F,R)

Managed wetlands


Impoundments (B,F,R)

Dredged material (B,F,R)

Inland habitats

Airports, sod farms, pastures, agricultural fields (B,F,R)

Forested wetlands and peninsulas (F,R)

Riparian, floodplain and lake shoreline (F)

We identified significant areas for shorebirds in the region (Table 5), known to support significant

numbers of shorebirds in breeding, migrating, or foraging/roosting periods.

For purposes of this planning document we estimated habitat acreage, condition (and/or management

issues) and ownership for each habitat type (Tables 6 and 7). However, many state biologists expressed

concern with their estimates (or did not make them at all) because they lack a sufficient foundation of

data. For many participants in the working group meetings, habitat delineation and assessing condition

and ownership were high priority research needs. Thus, goals specific to acreage for habitat acquisition

or management will not be available until an adequate inventory of habitats is conducted.

B) Management Objectives:

Highest priority

Protect food resources by a) identifying food sources and habitat requirements, b) developing better

understanding of invertebrate management, c) ranking habitats.

Control disturbance through a) landowner outreach, b) visitor management [education, controlling

access, providing viewing platforms, etc.], c) controlling recreational disturbance [from PWC, ATV,

beachgoers, dogs, etc.] by regulations and area closures, d) new regulations where necessary.

Reduce predation by a) habitat manipulation, b) predator control (fox, raccoon, crows, gulls, etc.) on

a site-specific basis where needed.

Work with regulatory agencies, researchers, and commissions to establish and maintain adequate and

ecologically healthy population levels of horseshoe crabs in the mid-Atlantic region.

High priority

Plan for oil spill response: a) do planning and simulations, b) monitor/quantify habitat and food

resources prior to spill as preparation for quantifying the direct and indirect effects of spills, c) post-

spill surveys to accurately quantify spill damages.

Coordinate management among public lands, especially management of impoundments among

states/refuges.

Moderate priority

Influence dredged material management: a) placement and quality of dredged material, b)

management of dredged material and water, c) reduce availability of contaminants at dredged

material habitats.

Identify key areas for Phragmites control in the region and target priority areas.

Train land managers to manage habitat for shorebirds by increasing the number of Manomet habitat

management workshops.

5. Management Coordination and Monitoring Needs

We determined there are significant needs in this area. Specifically, the region needs coordinated

monitoring protocol that will help measure current population levels, and set the basis for population

trend analysis. Monitoring procedures should make the best use of existing survey efforts wherever they

occur, such as spring surveys and banding in Delaware Bay.


Goal: Establish regional protocol for monitoring shorebird populations that is adaptable for continuing

long-term monitoring.

Existing monitoring includes: Delaware Bay spring migration, ISS (spring and fall), Delaware Bay

banding, Breeding Bird Surveys (uplands), Breeding Bird Atlases (breeding species), Refuge

surveys.

Currently recommended monitoring:

a. Spring migration aerial surveys at all important areas, including beach and marsh, along specific

survey routes to provide an index measure. Fall surveys focusing on marsh use. All surveys

should be designed to be statistically robust.

b. Surveys of impoundments - spring and fall, ground-based.

c. Either a new winter beach survey (aerial) or use of Christmas Bird Count (CBC) data for analysis

of trends of wintering populations.

d. Breeding shorebird surveys. Assess adequacy of Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) and/or Breeding

Bird Atlases (BBA). We recommend that this be done on a national level, with regional results.

e. Develop and implement monitoring of significant prey populations in selected areas.

Goal: Coordinate management of impounded wetlands in the region to accommodate maximum use by

migrating shorebirds, waterfowl and wading birds, through appropriate water management.

a. Create management partnerships among different agencies and groups to enhance habitat and

improve management.

b. Coordinate management among public lands: a) establish unified timing for management, and b)

coordinate management of impoundments among states/refuges.

c. Train land managers to manage habitat for shorebirds by increasing the number of Manomet

habitat management workshops, and training managers to identify and survey shorebirds and

control disturbance.

Coordinating personnel, by area and state (preliminary):

Delaware Bay, NJ and DE: Niles, Clark, Doolittle

Virginia Coastal Marshes and Barrier Islands (including Assateague): D. Schwab

Plymouth Beach, MA: S. Melvin

Plum Island/Merrimac River, MA: C. Hayes

Crane Beach, MA: S. Melvin

Third Cliff (Scituate), MA: S. Melvin

Sandy Neck (Barnstable), MA: S. Melvin

Monomoy NWR/South Beach, MA: S. Melvin, Refuge staff

Nauset Marsh (Eastham), MA: S. Melvin

Norton Point Beach (Edgartown), MA: S. Melvin

Smith Point (Nantucket), MA: S. Melvin

Long Island Atlantic Coast (and Jamaica Bay): B. Miller, H. Knoch, Refuge staff

Ripley Neck, ME: L. Tudor

Forsythe NWR, Brigantine, NJ: Refuge staff

Craney Island, VA: D. Schwab

Mainland Coastal VA: D. Schwab

Atlantic Coastal Salt Marshes (Northeastern MA south to VA): State and USFWS staff

Southern Maine coastal marshes (L. Tudor)

Cape May Peninsula (see Woodcock plan): C. Hayes, L. Niles, NJ State staff

Delmarva Peninsula uplands (see Woodcock plan): C. Hayes, DE State staff


Block Island (see Woodcock plan): C. Hayes, C. Raithel

Moosehorn NWR (see Woodcock plan): C. Hayes, ME State staff

Short grasslands (UPSA [B], BBSA [M]): State staff, private landowners

Atlantic Coastal Beaches (PIPL [B], SAND [M,W]): Defer to PIPL Recovery Plan

Lake Champlain, Lake Memphemagog, VT (J. Gobeille)

Connecticut River, VT (J. Gobeille)


6. Research Goals

Research is needed to effectively carry out the objectives of habitat protection and management in the

region:

Identify prey resources in significant shorebird areas such as stopovers and staging areas, and

determine optimal management techniques to promote these resources;

Determine the effects of environmental contaminants on shorebirds and their prey;

Determine prey resources in impoundments, and optimal management for both prey populations and

shorebird/waterbird management;

Determine the effects of disturbance and minimum protection buffers to maintain and enhance

shorebird habitat use of foraging and roosting areas;

Determine the effects of aquaculture (lobster pounds, salmon pens, hard clam, etc.) on shorebird

foraging habitats and shorebird habitat use, and identify needs for regulatory restrictions on these

developments if necessary.

Determine length of stay (turnover rates) at stopovers areas to allow population estimations.

Determine limiting factors for priority shorebirds on breeding, migrating or wintering areas.

Determine energetic and nutritional requirements of shorebirds.

7. Education Goals

The WASA (Western Atlantic Shorebird Association) initiative, coordinated by NOAA and USFWS,

may meet region-wide education goals beyond on-site outreach needs. WASA includes a web site for

shorebird-based education interests on the Atlantic Coast (www.vex.net/~hopscotc/shorebirds/). The

web site allows tracking of migration routes of priority shorebirds such as Red Knot, Ruddy Turnstones

and Sanderlings in the hemisphere, which can be accessed by students. Researchers and selected

individuals can contribute data on flocks and banded birds. The web site would allow for multiple

educational uses that involve students, classrooms, refuge managers and researchers, and may prove

useful for a central point of data accessibility. There should be full coordination of efforts with the

Sister Schools (sponsored by USFWS in the Pacific Flyway) and other educational initiatives.

On-site outreach is necessary at shorebird concentration areas (both migratory and breeding sites), to

minimize impacts of wildlife watchers and recreational visitors. Sites where disturbance is an issue are

prime areas for outreach and education efforts.

8. Funding Needs for Regional Goals (by State and Area)

Within each significant area, management and habitat needs and priorities were identified that are

known needs in those areas. Each area representative estimated costs to accomplish those tasks on an

annual or task basis. More areas will be included as they are considered necessary by group members

or reviewers. The table of "significant areas" and costs is included in Appendix B.


9. Recognition of individuals and organizations who contributed to the regional

report.

Stephen Brown, Manomet Center for Conservation Sciences, Manomet, MA

Kathleen Clark, NJ Division of Fish and Wildlife, Endangered Species Program, Woodbine, NJ

Jim Corven, Manomet Center for Conservation Sciences, Manomet, MA

Steve Eisenhauer, Natural Lands Trust, Fortescue, NJ

Lisa Gelvin-Innvaer (formerly with) DE Division of Fish and Wildlife, Dover, DE

John Gobeille, VT Dept. of Fish and Wildlife, Pittsford, VT

Chuck Hayes, Atlantic Coast Joint Venture, Charlestown, RI

John Kanter, NH Fish and Game

Scott Melvin, MA Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, Westborough, MA.

Bob Miller, NY Dept. of Environmental Conservation

Larry Niles, NJ Division of Fish and Wildlife, Endangered Species Program, Trenton, NJ

Chris Raithel, RI Division of Fish and Wildlife, West Kingston, RI

Ken Rosenberg, Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY

Dan Rosenblatt, NY Dept. of Environmental Conservation (Stony Brook)

Don Schwab, VA Dept of Game and Inland Fisheries, Suffolk, VA

Barry Truitt, The Nature Conservancy, Nassawadox, VA

Lindsay Tudor, ME Dept. of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, Bangor, ME

Joan Walsh, NJ Audubon Society, Cape May Court House, NJ


Table 1. Species priority list based on national scoring, and priority in the Northern Atlantic.

National Scoresa National Atlantic Flyway

Species PT RA TB TN BD ND Priority N. Atlantic.b Reg. Pr.

c

Piping Plover 5 5 5 4 4 4 5 m,B

Eskimo Curlew 5 5 3 4 5 5 5 M

American Oystercatcher 3 5 4 4 3 4 4 B 5

Whimbrel 5 4 2 2 3 2 4 M 5

Red Knot 5 2 2 4 3 3 4 M 5

American Woodcock 5 1 4 3 2 3 4 M,W,B 5

American Golden-Plover 4 3 2 4 2 3 4 m

Wilson's Plover 3 4 4 4 4 3 4 b

Hudsonian Godwit 3 4 3 4 4 4 4 M

Marbled Godwit 4 3 4 4 3 3 4 m

Ruddy Turnstone 4 3 2 4 2 2 4 M,w

Sanderling 5 2 2 4 2 1 4 M,w

Buff-breasted Sandpiper 4 4 3 4 3 4 4 M

Upland Sandpiper 2(5) 2 2 4 2 3 2 m,b 4

Greater Yellowlegs 3 4 2 2 2 1 3 M 4

Willet 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 M,B,w 4

Semipalmated Sandpiper 5 1 2 3 3 3 3 M 4

Wilson's Phalarope 4 1 3 4 2 5 4 m 3

Black-bellied Plover 5 3 2 2 2 1 3 M,w

American Avocet 3 2 3 4 2 3 3 m

Solitary Sandpiper 3 3 4 2 3 2 3 M

Spotted Sandpiper 3 2 2 2 1 1 3 M,B

Least Sandpiper 5 2 2 2 2 2 3 M

Dunlin 5 1 2 3 2 3 3 M,W

Stilt Sandpiper 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 m

Short-billed Dowitcher 5 2 2 3 3 2 3 M

Common Snipe 5 1 2 2 1 2 3 M,w,B

Red-necked Phalarope 4 1 2 3 1 3 3 M

Red Phalarope 4 1 2 3 2 1 3 M

Purple Sandpiper 2 5 2 3 3 3 2 W 3

White-rumped Sandpiper 3 2 2 2 3 3 2 M 3

Killdeer 5 1 3 3 1 2 3 m,w,B 2

Western Sandpiper 3 1 2 4 4 2 3 M 2

Semipalmated Plover 3 3 2 2 1 1 2 M

Lesser Yellowlegs 3 2 2 3 2 1 2 M

Baird's Sandpiper 3 2 2 2 3 3 2 m

Pectoral Sandpiper 3 2 2 2 2 3 2 m

Long-billed Dowitcher 2 2 2 3 4 3 2 m a Nat. Priority Variables: PT=Pop Trend; RA=Relative Abundance; TB=Threats in Breeding season;

TN=Threats in Non-breeding season; BD=Breeding Distribution; ND=Non-breeding Distribution b Code: B = breeding, M = migration, and W = wintering. B,M,W = high concentrations, region extremely

important to the species relative to the majority of other regions. B,M,W = common or locally abundant,

region important to the species. b,m,w = uncommon to fairly common, region within species range but

occurs in low relative abundance relative to other regions. c Reg. Pr. = Regional Priority, if different from national.


Table 2. Preliminary list of priority species by guild-group, for the North Atlantic planning region.

SPECIES (and Seasons of Occurrence

b)

PRIORITY

LEVELa

TERR/AQUA

GLEANERS

TERR/AQUA

GLEANERS/

PROBERS

AQUA/TERR

PROBERS/

GLEANERS

AQUA

PROBERS

AQUA

GLEANERS

AQUA

GLEANERS/

SWEEPERS

PROBERS/

PRIERS

High (5) PIPL (B, m) ESCU (M) REKN (M) AMOY (B)

WHIM (M)

AMWO (B,W,M)

Moderate-High (4) WIPL (b) RUTU (M,w) MAGO (m) GRYE (M)

AGPL (m) UPSA (m,b) SAND (M, w) WILL (m,w,B)

HUGO (M) BBSA (m)

Moderate (3) BBPL (M,w) SPSA (M,B) SESA (M) SOSA (M) AMAV (m)

KILL (m,w,B) PUSA (W) SBDO (M) RNPH (M)

WRSA (M) REPH (M)

LESA (M) WIPH (m)

DUNL (M,W)

STSA (m)

COSN (M,w,B)

Moderate-Low (2) SEPL (M) WESA (m) LEYE (M)

BASA (m)

PESA (m)

LBDO (m) a See Table 1 for actual scores for priority criteria.

b B=breeding, W=winter, M=migration; when bold considered very important to species, lower case present but not in high numbers.

Species codes as follows:

BBPL=Black-bellied Plover LBCU=Long-billed Curlew PESA=Pectoral Sandpiper HUGO=Hudsonian Godwit PUSA=Purple Sandpiper

AMGP=American Golden Plover SAND=Sanderling STSA=Stilt Sandpiper MAGO=Marbled Godwit AMAV=American Avocet

WIPL=Wilson’s Plover SESP=Semipalmated Sandpiper DUNL=Dunlin GRYE=Greater Yellowlegs WIPH=Wilson’s Phalarope

SEPL=Semipalmated Plover WESA=Western Sandpiper SBDO=Short-billed Dowitcher LEYE=Lesser Yellowlegs RNPH=Red-necked Phalarope

PIPL=Piping Plover LESA=Least Sandpiper LBDO=Long-billed Dowitcher SOSA=Solitary Sandpiper REPH=Red Phalarope

KILL=Killdeer WRSA=White-rumped Sandpiper COSN=Common Snipe WILL=Willet AMOY=Am. Oystercatcher

WHIM=Whimbrel BASA=Baird’s Sandpiper BBSA=Buff-breasted Sandpiper RUTU=Ruddy Turnstone AMWO=Am. Woodcock

REKN=Red Knot UPSA=Upland Sandpiper SPSA=Spotted Sandpiper


Table 3. Estimated shorebird numbers (and % of Hemispheric population) in the North Atlantic region, from peak counts and survey data.

Species Estimated

Hemisphere

Populationa

Region Peak

Counts

% in

Region

Season Site Habitat

Piping Plover 6,000 2,270 38% Breeding Coastal ME to no. VA Beach Eskimo Curlew ? American Golden

Plover 150,000 500 (1970) <1% Fall NY Inland

Wilson's Plover 30,000 American

Oystercatcher 3,200

Whimbrel 50,000 41,000 (1995) 82% Spring VA Barrier Islands e Mudflat

Hudsonian Godwit 45,500b

Marbled Godwit 160,000 Ruddy Turnstone 235,000 127,600 (1999) 54% Spring Delaware Bay (NJ & DE)

d Beach

Red Knot 85,000c 94,460 (1989)

8,955 (1996)

100%

11%

Spring

Spring

Delaware Bay (NJ & DE)

VA Barrier Islands e

Beach

Beach Sanderling 200,000 33,800 (1986)

3,971 (1995)

17%

2%

Spring

Spring


VA Barrier Islands

Beach

Beach Buff-breasted

Sandpiper 25,000 89 (1995) <1% Fall NJ

American Woodcock Wilson's Phalarope 1,500,000 Black-bellied Plover 120,000 25,000 (1994) 21% Spring VA Barrier Islands

e Mudflat

Killdeer 2,000,000 f American Avocet 450,000 Greater Yellowlegs 124,000 3000 (1997) 2% Fall Forsythe NWR (NJ) Mudflat Solitary Sandpiper 184,000 f Willet 250,000 1000 (1979) <1% Fall Forsythe NWR (NJ) Beach Spotted Sandpiper 650,000 f Semipalmated

Sandpiper 1,600,000

b 267,300 (1986)

53950 (1994)

49,000 (1994)

17%

3%

3%

Spring

Fall

Spring


ME Coast

VA Barrier Islands

Beach

Intertidal

Mudflat


Species Estimated

Hemisphere

Populationa

Region Peak

Counts

% in

Region

Season Site Habitat

Western Sandpiper 4,000,000 2,500 (1975) <1% Fall Forsythe NWR (NJ) Mudflat Least Sandpiper 600,000 6,000 (1992) 1% Fall Forsythe NWR (NJ) Mudflat Dunlin 1,000,000 31,350 (1999)

83,000 (1994)

3%

8%

Spring

Spring


VA Barrier Islands

Beach

Mudflat Stilt Sandpiper 200,000 465 (1981) <1% Fall Forsythe NWR (NJ) Short-billed

Dowitcher 300,000 11,400 (1999)

48,000 (1994)

4%

16%

Spring

Spring


VA Barrier Islands

Beach

Mudflat Common Snipe 1,400,000 Red-necked

Phalarope 2,500,000 10,000 (1963)

<2,000 (1990)

<1%

<1%

Fall

Fall

MA Coast

ME Coast (early accounts

of >1,000,000)

Offshore

Offshore

Red Phalarope 1,000,000 Semipalmated Plover 150,000 8,082 (1994) 5% Fall ME Coast Beach Lesser Yellowlegs 744,000 4,000 (1947)

1,500 (1994)

<1%

<1%

Fall

Fall

MA Coast

ME Coast

Beach

Beach Upland Sandpiper 400,000 f 300 (1998) 2% Breeding ME Agricultural fields White-rumped

Sandpiper 500,000 1,115 (1994)

1,000 (1990)

<1%

<1%

Fall

Fall

ME Coast

Long Island, NY Coast

Beach

Beach Baird's Sandpiper 300,000 Pectoral Sandpiper 450,000 620 (1986) <1% Spring Inland NJ Marsh Purple Sandpiper 16,000 Long-billed

Dowitcher 500,000 1,000 (1993) <1% Fall Forsythe NWR (NJ) Mudflat

a Estimates taken from Hunter et al., 1999, Southeastern Region Shorebird Habitat Plan, unless otherwise noted.

b Morrison and Ross (1989).

c Baker (unpubl. data)

d Clark and Niles (unpubl. data)

e Watts and Truitt (unpubl. data)

f Rosenberg (BBS data)


Table 4. Priority 5, 4, and 3 shorebirds by habitat, with national and regional scoring and type of habitat

use, in the North Atlantic region. Boldface indicates "focal species" for the habitat type.

Habitat Species National

Priority

No. Atlantic

Regional

Priority (if

different)

Season Habitat

Use

Beachfront Piping Plover 5 m,B B

American Oystercatcher 4 5 B B

Red Knot 4 5 M F,R

Wilson's Plover 4 b B

Ruddy Turnstone 4 M,w F,R

Sanderling 4 M,w F,R,W

Purple Sandpiper (rocky beach) 2 3 W F,W

Intertidal-Mud Whimbrel 4 5 M F

Eskimo Curlew 5 M F

Red Knot 4 5 M F,R

Hudsonian Godwit 4 M F,R

American Golden-Plover 4 m F

Marbled Godwit 4 m F

Greater Yellowlegs 3 4 M F

Semipalmated Sandpiper 3 4 M F,R

Black-bellied Plover 3 M,w F,W

Least Sandpiper 3 M F

Dunlin 3 M,W F,W

Stilt Sandpiper 3 m F

Short-billed Dowitcher 3 M F

White-rumped Sandpiper 2 3 M F

Intertidal-Marsh Whimbrel 4 5 M F,R

Greater Yellowlegs 3 4 M F,R

Willet 3 4 M,B,w B,F,R

Black-bellied Plover 3 M,w F,R,W

American Avocet 3 m F

Common Snipe 3 M,w,B F,B

Inland American Woodcock 4 5 B,W,M B,F,R

American Golden-Plover 4 m F,R

Buff-breasted Sandpiper 4 M F,R

Upland Sandpiper 2 4 m,b F,R

Wilson's Phalarope 4 3 m F,R

Solitary Sandpiper 3 M F

Spotted Sandpiper 3 M,B F,B

Offshore-Pelagic Red-necked Phalarope 3 M F

Red Phalarope 3 M F


Table 5. Significant areas for shorebirds within the Northern Atlantic region.

Virginia

Virginia Coastal Marshes and Mudflats

Virginia Barrier Islands (including Assateague)

Craney Island, VA

Mainland Coastal VA

*Delmarva Peninsula (uplands)

Maryland

Atlantic Coastal Salt Marshes

Atlantic Coastal Beaches


Delaware

Delaware Bay




New Jersey

Delaware Bay

Forsythe NWR, Brigantine, NJ



*Cape May Peninsula (uplands)

Pennsylvania

New York

Long Island Atlantic Coast (and Jamaica Bay)



Connecticut



Rhode Island



*Block Island (uplands)

Vermont

Lakes Champlain and Memphremagog

Connecticut River

New Hampshire

Gulf of Maine Coastal Marshes

Great Bay Estuary


Isles of Shoals

Inland impoundments; Inland airports, sod farms, pastures


Massachusetts

Plymouth Beach / Monomoy, MA

Plum Island, MA



Maine

Down East Intertidal Mudflats

Gulf of Maine coastal marshes


*Moosehorn NWR (uplands)

*Other plans exist for woodcock and piping plover that should be reviewed for a) consistency of goals and

priorities, b) considering additions to benefit shorebirds, c) additional shorebird emphasis that may attract

additional funding.


Table 6. Estimated acreage of major habitat types, and condition issues, in the North Atlantic region, by state. Habitat type ME Con* NH Con VT Con MA Con RI Con CT Con NY Con PA Con NJ Con DE Con MD Con VA** Con Total by

Habitat

Beach Front

(high/low energy,

sandflats,

rocky beach)

38400 1, 2 26000 1852 37200 1,2,3 0 6872 2 120 2 2050 110,642

Intertidal--non-vegetated

(mudflats, mud banks)

53760 1 44000 1536 800000 500 3 28060 4 3800 166000 1,096,120

Intertidal--vegetated

(salt marshes)

19840 1 47000 2176 25100 4 1000 3,4 250000 4 34100 4 206000 583,040

Managed wetlands

(impoundments, dredge)

0 na na 600 500 4 1500 4 1030 5200 8,830

Inland habitats

(airports, pastures)

31360 2 135000 4160 10000 2 500 2 50000 1,2 2400 1 2200 231,460

* Known Condition Issues:

1. Development threats

2. Human disturbance/Alternate management

3. Degraded-pollution, etc.

4. Exotic vegetation

** Figures for VA refer to seaside of VA Eastern Shore, not Ches Bay.

Table 7. Major habitat types and estimated public ownership (%) in the North Atlantic region, by state. Habitat types ME Own* NH Own VT Own MA Own RI Own CT Own NY Own PA Own NJ Own DE Own MD Own VA** Own Acres

Public

%

Beach Front

(high/low energy,

sandflats, rocky beach)

38400 5 26000 unk. 1852 80 37200 20 0 6872 80 120 40 2050 93 16812 15

Intertidal--non-vegetated

(mudflats, mud banks)

53760 5 44000 unk. 1536 99 800000 70 500 20 28060 80 3800 60 166000 80 720316 66

Intertidal--vegetated

(salt marshes)

19840 45 47000 unk. 2176 99 25100 70 1000 90 250000 80 34100 60 206000 40 330258 57

Managed wetlands

(impoundments,etc)

0 unk. unk. na. 600 100 500 80 1500 100 1030 90 5200 95 8367 95

Inland habitats

(airports, pastures)

31360 0 135000 unk. 4160 100 10000 0 500 10 50000 10 2500 30 2200 0 5800 3

* Ownership: Estimated % in Public or Conservation ownership

** Figures for VA refer to seaside of VA Eastern Shore, not Chesapeake Bay

Appendix A

Appendix A. Maps of two BCRs found in the North Atlantic region.

Land Cover

Managed Lands

Point Sites

Appendix A

Bird Conservation Region 14: New England/Mid Atlantic Coast

Appendix A

Bird Conservation Region 30: Atlantic Northern Forest

Appendix B.

Appendix B. Estimated costs for monitoring, management and research needs by

area.

New Jersey and Delaware: Delaware Bay Niles, Clark, Gelvin-Innvaer, Eisenhauer

Long-term, statistically robust surveys of shorebirds (by aircraft) on bay

beaches

25,000 /yr

Annual survey of horseshoe crabs and eggs in sediment 70,000 /yr

Surveys of shorebirds in marshes and impoundments 50,000 /yr

Annual banding / color-marking of shorebirds and resighting surveys 30,000 /yr

Food resources: Maintain HSCrab eggs at or above 1990 levels (including

research and implementation)

150,000 /yr

Control disturbance through on-site outreach and law enforcement 100,000 /yr

Oil spill response - implement existing plan 200,000 /yr

Coordination -

- increase state land manager focus re: impoundments 100,000 /yr

- ID prey preferences of shorebirds, monitor invert pops. and manage

impoundments for optimal foraging

50,000 /yr

Land manager training & developing trainers 25,000 /yr

Dredged material - Develop parameters for beach replenishment with

dredge for HSCrab and shorebirds

80,000 /yr

Acquisition - Identify priority lands 20,000

- Land acquisition and easements ? (open-ended)

Phragmites control - 50,000 /yr

- map and identify areas and target priorities

- restore priority areas

Predator control -

- liberalize regs for states to control

20,000 /yr

Virginia: VA Coastal Marshes and Barrier Islands Schwab

Acquisition 500,000 /yr

Easements and/or development rights 200,000 /yr

Education/Outreach 30,000 /yr

Surveys/Monitoring - Aerial survey annually 50,000

Research

- benthos / shorebird use / prey quality

- breeding species

- dredge material - disposal and use

260,000 /yr

Disturbance

- signage

- enforcement

50,000 /yr

Phragmites control 250,000/yr

Craney Island, VA Schwab

Surveys / Monitoring 10,000 /yr

Research 120,000 /yr

- contaminants

- benthos

Outreach / Education 10,000 /yr

Appendix B.

Mainland Chesapeake Bay, VA Schwab

Acquisition 500,000 /yr

Training (60 people) 50,000

Education/Outreach 30,000 /yr

Surveys/Monitoring - Aerial survey annually 50,000/yr

Research

- benthos / inverts in impoundments

- benthos / inverts in open marsh

120,000

Phragmites / cattail control 100,000

Impoundment creation / enhancement / operation 200,000 /yr

Identify important sites 60,000

New York: Long Island Atlantic Coast McDougal

Ecological Assessment

- determine key shorebird areas (breeding, staging, etc.)

- assess pop. status of shorebirds (migr. and breeding)

- investigate food resources, habitat, predation/other mortality

200,000

Management Partnerships

- Control/manage disturbance

- Habitat management, restoration, creation at selected/target sites

50,000 /yr

Predation

- research and control, monitoring, analysis

30,000 /yr

All States: Atlantic Coastal Salt Marsh (local actions) Walsh

Enhance habitat in areas with water control structures 200,000 /yr

Identify areas with Phragmites that could support good habitat if managed 50,000 /yr

Conduct surveys of winter shorebird use 60,000 /yr

Conduct surveys of summer, breeding shorebird use and productivity

(e.g., willets)

30,000 /yr

Rhode Island Raithel

Assessment: Assess existing data on known shorebird areas (breeding

and migratory)

Quantify migratory shorebird populations:

- Develop/implement annual survey protocols

- Assess importance of Narragansett Bay to migratory shorebirds

- Assess importance of south shore marshes to migratory shorebirds

- Develop and implement invertebrate monitoring in shorebird habitats

Protect migratory shorebird habitat

1. Treat current shorebird concentration points as focal areas and

develop site-specific management plans to maintain or enhance

habitat quality for migratory shorebirds.

- Protect surrounding upland habitats via acquisition or easement

- Regulate, prevent, or mitigate process (e.g., dredging and shoreline

Appendix B.

stabilization) that can degrade habitat. Apply Special Area

Management Plans (SAM) to enforce more stringent envir. review,

and identify all significant shorebird areas in CZM regulations.

- Work to improve management of adjacent private lands.

- Mitigate risk of contaminants and other degradations from ag/urban

run-off, etc.

- Develop private landowners guide to describe effects of vegetation

clearing, pesticides, failed septic systems, etc.

Management Options

- Investigate feasibility of natural pond drawdowns to create habitat

during peak shorebird migration.

- Restore or recover degraded coastal wetlands.

New Hampshire Kanter, Palaschuk

Assessment:

Assess existing data on known shorebird areas (breeding and migratory)

Conduct surveys of breeding shorebird (i.e., PIPL, UPSA, SPSA, WILL,

COSN) populations, habitat use, and productivity.

Document migratory shorebird populations, feeding areas, and roosting

sites.

Develop and implement invertebrate monitoring in shorebird habitats.

Evaluate use of state waterfowl management areas by migrating

shorebirds.

50,000/yr

Protection:

Promote saltmarsh restoration efforts.

Develop and implement site-specific management plans for Hampton-

Seabrook estuary, Great Bay estuary, Little Harbor estuary, Rye Harbor

estuary, coastal beaches, and other identified areas of importance.

Protect coastal marshes and adjacent uplands via acquisition or

easements.

Develop and implement regulatory and non-regulatory approaches to

reduce impacts from recreational activities.

100,000/yr

Massachusetts Melvin

Breeding shorebirds: monitoring, protection, and habitat management 250,000/yr

Migratory shorebirds: monitoring, protection, and habitat management.

100,000/yr

Statewide coordination of mointoring and management, data

management, technical assistance to managers and landowners,

environmental review and permitting.

150,000/yr

Research: Breeding shorebirds (100,000/yr)

Migratory shorebirds (200,000/yr)

300,000/yr

Predator monitoring, research, and control. 150,000/yr

Education and outreach. 30,000/yr

Appendix B.

Maine: Ripley Neck Area, Maine Tudor

Assess existing data on shorebird staging areas to determine key areas on

Ripley Neck and adjacent intertidal flats. Develop and implement

annual survey protocols to quantify migratory shorebird populations

using the area.

30,000 /yr

Investigate / implement protection through land acquisition, easements,

and landowner agreements.

?

Develop and implement invertebrate monitoring in shorebird feeding

habitats.

10,000 /yr

Research the effects of aquaculture (lobster pounds, salmon pens, etc.) on

or near shorebird feeding habitats.

20,000 /yr

Develop and implement education / outreach programs. 10,000 /yr

Maine: Lubec Sand Bar, Maine Tudor

Develop and implement annual survey protocols to quantify migratory

shorebird populations using Lubec Sand Bar.

15,000 /yr

Develop and implement invertebrate monitoring in shorebird foraging

areas

10,000 /yr

Determine the effects of disturbance and establish necessary

buffer/protection zones for roosting areas.

10,000 /yr

Develop and implement education / outreach programs. 10,000 /yr

northern atlantic regional shorebird plan

Documents